In light of the recent "talk" given by Colin Powell at the United Nations yesterday, I went on a bit of a search to see converging and diverging views within the international media. Whether for or against the war in Iraq, I think most people will agree that perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the debate thus far is the feeling of never getting a full grasp on the facts presented to us in newspapers and on television.
To illustrate this point, I offer two quotes from two major newspapers from two opposing camps (the US and France) from the same day.
First, the New York Time's closing paragraphs:
(link only works if you have an account, but setting up a NY Times account is easy, worthwhile, and free)
And then, Le Monde's second-to-last paragraph:
(translated from French, although I am pretty bad at translating...)
Now go back and compare the first line in the NY Times piece to the last line of the translation of the French article. Although the two quotes are not directly butting heads, aren't they rather different views of the same story? From the NY Times articles, I read it as Powell walking away from the talk having successfully made his point, much to the surprise of some skeptics. From Le Monde's article, it seems that people were thinking, "Yeah, well, he sort of has a point, but it's not all that convincing."
Hmm. Well, the Times and Le Monde aren't really in opposing camps; they're both more or less opposed to the Bush administration. So I guess it's just a matter of degree. If the Times is cautiously calling Powell's presentation a success, you can imagine what the right-wing papers here are writing.
Left-leaning though it may be, the Times still has to convey some semblance of neutrality, which Le Monde does not. And given all the dumb rhetoric flying around about France no longer being an ally of the U.S., it's not surprising that Le Monde would downplay Powell's presentation.
Funny thing is, around here, Le Monde is seen as the most objective newspaper around.
I'm not surprised by the difference between the two newspapers' presentation. But I think it's important to remind ourselves that everything we are reading is biased somehow, and that just because it's in print, it doesn't mean we can necessarily believe every word blindly. Everything's slanted.
Your comment did make me consider that I *should* go check out the super right wing papers. It's so easy to only get input from one side, or even just one source.